Situation of deprivation of liberty to handle the detainees and legal and administrative measures applied at the examined facility were reviewed. 16. The annexes to this report set out in detail the conclusions sent to the various authorities, relating to each particular facility. The deficiencies and, where appropriate, good practices, observed during these visits, are set out below. 17. The poor coverage of the video-surveillance system persists in most of the places visited. As mentioned in paragraph 14 of Annual Report 2012, both the DGP and the DGGC reported that the setting up of a system conforming to the criteria of this Institution is subject to the budgetary availability for this item. Notwithstanding the differences of criteria between both bodies, in respect of the installation or otherwise of cameras within the cells, at the visits made to the facilities of the GC it was reported that the recording of pictures was inappropriate, considering that this would violate the privacy of the detainees. This practice prevents viewing and subsequently submitting any incidents that may have occurred, which should be corrected. 18. The presence of custody officers in the cell area, when detainees are present, is essential, to avoid situations of risk in those cases in which the immediate presence of offices may be necessary. In this respect, a recommendation has been made to the DGP to correct, provided that sufficient personnel is available at the facility, this deficiency, recorded in paragraph 16 of Annual Report 2012. Said body reported that the Recommendation was referred to the Attached Operating Directorate for it to proceed to change the previous instructions. 19. Only at two of the visited facilities, the CNP district stations of Córdoba and of Madrid-Vallecas, was it observed that detainees were informed in writing, in the printed form for the reading of rights, of the possibility of instituting habeas corpus proceedings, which should be corrected according to the criterion of this Institution, recorded in paragraphs 476 of Annual Report 2010 and 19 of Annual Report 2012. 20. The deficiency mentioned in paragraph 20 of Annual Report 2012, relating to the fact that certain detainees had held an “interview” with police officers, before making a statement and being assisted by a lawyer, was observed also at the visits made to the superior headquarters of the CNP in Toledo and Valencia and at the police stations of this corps in Burgos, Palencia and Zamora. The DGP, in all the aforementioned cases, reported that instructions had been given for the subject matter, purpose and duration of the interview or arrangement to be recorded in the custody form and for the investigation dossier to be sent to the court to report it. Deficiencies and good practices Poor coverage of videosurveillance system The presence of custody officers in the cell area is essential Information on the possibility of instituting habeas corpus proceedings Cases of “interviews” with police officers without presence of a lawyer 43